richardak: (Default)
[personal profile] richardak posting in [community profile] scans_daily
In the recent Question back-up feature in Detective Comics, the new Question, Renee Montoya, teamed up with the Huntress, Helena Bertinelli.  What makes this interesting is that, while they don't know each other all that well, they were both close, at different times, with the previous Question.  This leads to what, to me at least, is a very interesting conversation between the two of them:

What makes this such an interesting conversation is that Helena is saying that Charlie/Vic tried to save her, and succeeded.  It must be noted that she measures this success in terms of her physical and emotional well-being: she's still here.  Now consider this scan from Batman/Huntress: Cry for Blood, which was, as far as I know, the last meeting between Helena and Charlie/Vic:

Here, Helena has just successfully murdered Santo Cassamento, and in such a way that the law can't touch her.  Charlie is especially angry because she tricked him into helping her, in such a way and so that neither he, nor Batman, Robin, Nightwing, nor Oracle would realize what she was up to until it was too late.  Charlie is damning her, and she insists that she has been a damned soul for a long time.  So here, it definitely looks like he has failed to save her.  In this case, though, they are discussing salvation and damnation in the traditional Catholic sense of going to heaven or hell when she dies. 

So the question (sorry) is, has she revised her thinking, such that she now believes that she can still be saved, in the sense of going to heaven, or, has she come to be so at peace with the inevitability of her ultimate damnation that she is, in effect, only worried about her temporal welfare.  Just what does she mean, exactly, when she tells Renee that, since she's still here, Vic must have saved her? 

It should be noted, as an aside, that both these comics were written by the same author, Greg Rucka, so I don't think any of this is at all coincidental.  I just thought it was a fascinating conversation with a very interesting subtext. 

Date: 2011-03-13 06:36 pm (UTC)
salinea: (bite me)
From: [personal profile] salinea
Yes, sorry, I meant "not only" or "not exactly". Or something >_>;

Someone with better knowledge of Catholicism corrects me if I am wrong; would it not be considered a sin in itself for a Catholic to think that they are beyond redemption?

The thing is, acceptance and being at peace do not mean that she doesn't still think she's damned; it's possible that she may just be at peace with that fact.
True. I don't know which it is for Helena.

(I can has Helena icon! :D)

Date: 2011-03-13 06:55 pm (UTC)
icon_uk: (Default)
From: [personal profile] icon_uk
would it not be considered a sin in itself for a Catholic to think that they are beyond redemption?

I'm not sure it's seen as a sin to believe you're beyond redemption, just a human failing, and an incorrect one.

Date: 2011-03-13 07:05 pm (UTC)
salinea: (you're cute)
From: [personal profile] salinea

Date: 2011-03-13 11:26 pm (UTC)
junipepper: (jumplines)
From: [personal profile] junipepper
Actually, I think it's a sin against Hope (Hope being one of the most important theological virtues).

I've done a fair amount of reading about world religions, but am not a Catholic, so I could be wrong. Easily.

Date: 2011-03-15 03:21 am (UTC)
shadowpsykie: Information (Default)
From: [personal profile] shadowpsykie
suicide is a sin against hope.

feeling you are beyond redemption skirts the line dangerously close because this usually leads to suicide.

Date: 2011-03-13 07:56 pm (UTC)
elf: Stained glass interlocking pentagons (Law of Fives)
From: [personal profile] elf
would it not be considered a sin in itself for a Catholic to think that they are beyond redemption?

The sin of hubris, maybe; "I'm so bad even God couldn't fix me." But I suspect anyone who thought that, wouldn't be worried about whether or not it was a sin. And if they later repented of whatever convinced them they were damned, thinking they were unredeemable in the interim wouldn't be a major concern.

Date: 2011-03-14 03:48 am (UTC)
heckfire: (Default)
From: [personal profile] heckfire
SO, by saying you've sinned beyond redemption, you're sinning MORE. *headdesk* That's why I'm functionally agnostic, folks...I believe in God, not the churches.

Date: 2011-03-14 04:09 am (UTC)
elf: Stained glass interlocking pentagons (Law of Fives)
From: [personal profile] elf
Not my theology; my gods tolerate hubris as long as it entertains them. From what I know of Catholic doctrine, it'd be a sin to assume one is unredeemable, but that's probably minor in comparison to whatever sin(s) one committed to reach that conclusion.

Date: 2011-03-14 04:24 am (UTC)
heckfire: (Default)
From: [personal profile] heckfire
VERY valid point, there...I suppose the "sin of unredeemability (sp?)" is sorta there to keep people from saying "Fuck it, I'm going to Hell anyway" like Huntress did. Better to offer an out that allows for redemption (by guilting it on the sinner still, but that's Catholic doctrine for you) than to just toss them to the proverbial wolves, huh?

Date: 2011-03-14 11:53 am (UTC)
salinea: (bite me)
From: [personal profile] salinea
... yes, truly, saying that someone is never unredeemable is horribly intolerant of any Church (note that the only people who said this was a sin were people who ware not Catholics, myself included).


scans_daily: (Default)
Scans Daily


Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, [community profile] scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.

Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, [community profile] scans_daily is probably not for you.

Please read the community ethos and rules before posting or commenting.

October 2017

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 2425262728

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags